22 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by sumydidWell you've had a go at trivializing the fact that a couple of posters here are trying to subtly bully someone they disagree with through misused and loaded language. If this doesn't bother you then, please, don't let it bother you. 😀
Ok then, please proceed and sorry to bother.
22 Nov 11
2 edits
Originally posted by Rajk999Oh Geez, you really are trying to get me for this "indoctrination" charge, aren't you?
If you want me to accept that you dont try to indoctrinate then you need to ACT like you dont want to indoctrinate. In that thread I said that the Bible said that homosexuality is a sin, and made it clear that nobody has to accept that. Clearly there was no intention to indoctrinate. You need to do the same.
Christians are supposed to TELL others about Ch ...[text shortened]... out Christianity you keep telling me about Christianity .. again another sign of indoctrination.
Whats your beef man?
I'm basically (more or less like you (or the post that I'm responding to here)-ie that i put for ward my views and that people cant take them or leave them as they wish. I really have no intention of trying to indoctrinate anyone-despite you trying to accuse me of such.
Why cant you see the similarities in our posting styles instead of trying to find differences? Seriously. I will re-state-for everyone interested (I doubt that many are),
I wish to indoctrinate no one. Why do you persist in trying to accuse me of such. I had held you in high esteem (for a christian poster), but your insistence on trying to make me out to be an indoctrinator leaves me cold man.
I have said, a few times now, that i in no way wish to indoctrinate anyone. Why cant you just leave it? i'm happy to. What drives you to want to make me out to be an 'indoctrinator'? (I suspect it is your warped christian views, but you can counter that, if you wish,but i really dont see where this would lead us (?) )
At this stage there is no victor, in this "debate" , and I dont see one emerging, because I KNOW that I am definately NOT trying to do that. Why do you persist in your line of questioning? what do you hope to achieve?
I reckon it's your homophobic views that drive your line of questioning. please correct me if you think I am wrong 🙂
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by FMFNo, I only said you made your point and you're beating a dead horse. You argued, so, having said what I said and realizing I'd be a hypocrite to continue, I backed off.
Well you've had a go at trivializing the fact that a couple of posters here are trying to subtly bully someone they disagree with through misused and loaded language. If this doesn't bother you then, please, don't let it bother you. 😀
It doesn't bother me in the least that someone would misplace the word "indoctrinate." Probably because I've seen the word used as a sword against Christians so many times, it hardly goes noticed anymore.
But unlike you, I don't see it as "bullying."
Like I said. Proceed, and, sorry to bother.
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by Rajk999Actually I dont have rules,as such-only guidelines.
Have fun with your religion .. must be nice to make up your own rules. Whats the name of the mental institution you are in ? 😀
It's a shame you dont take me seriously , because it seems as if you think that I just make up my rules/guidelines to make it easier for me (or others) where nothing could be further from the truth.
My tenets are very simple on paper, but very difficult in practice.
Feel free to question me on one of my tenets and you will quickly realize that I do take my religion very seriously, and that it is no "walk in the park"
The ball is in your court 🙂
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by Rajk999"Back down to reality"?
A religion in which you make up your own rules? You need to stop fooling yourself and get back down to reality.
I dont fall for your indoctrination. You not that persuasive so dont think Im a 'poor thing'
Are you kidding?
What part of reality it is that you think that that I am not adhering to?
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by RJHindsInfluence on the listener IS NOT indoctrination.
From Dictionary.com
in·doc·tri·nate
1.
to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to
imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.
2.
to teach or inculcate.
3.
to imbue with learning.
o·pin·ion
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce
complete certaint ...[text shortened]... is the correct word. It is not merely
stating an opinion, but also to influence the listener.
22 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by sumydidWell I noticed it. So you condone people distorting language to undermine Christian beliefs and arguments or to create subtle ad hominems? You don't think it would be good for this kind of thing to be reduced by standing up for what words mean and not just caving in in the face of lower, lazier, looser standards of language use?
It doesn't bother me in the least that someone would misplace the word "indoctrinate." Probably because I've seen the word used as a sword against Christians so many times, it hardly goes noticed anymore.
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by FMFWhat part of me welcoming you to proceed do you equate with me supporting the kind of behavior you describe? I can hardly count the baseless assumptions you squeezed into that post.
Well I noticed it. So you condone people distorting language to undermine Christian beliefs and arguments or to create subtle ad hominems? You don't think it would be good for this kind of thing to be reduced by standing up for what words mean and not just caving in in the face of lower, lazier, looser standards of language use?
For Pete's sake, PROCEED, my good man.
22 Nov 11
1 edit
I believe this whole notion of me trying to "indoctrinate" people came from page 7 where I challenged Rj to show me where I have tried "indoctrinate people" into my way of thinking ,(or what ever) , and Rajk has stepped in and tried to show how I was trying do just that.
Since then he has been trying post after post to prove that I am an "indoctrinator" (or whatever), where nothing could be further from the truth.
1. The question was directed at RJ and he has just avoided it,like so many other questions directed at him,and I suspect the only reason that Rajk has defended him is because he is a fellow christian.
2. Rajk has defended his claim (ie that i am an ""indoctrinator"(of some sort), and that I was somehow out of line with my claim that I was not (an indoctrinator) )
The act is that Rajk as constantly tried to back up his ridiculous claim by whatever means at his disposal to prove that I AM an "indoctrinator".
My conclusion is that he has only done this,(and been subsequently backed up by RJ (who has negated my origonal proposal), so that he could ride on the back of Rajks origonal charge (ie, that I am an "indoctrinator" ), to back up ,(imo
) riduculous claims, ie that homosexuality is "wrong" .
It is my view that homosexuality is just as sinful ,(if sinful at all), as heterosexuality.
After all, what is the difference? ( other than the obvious that it is woman on woman,(or man on man), rather than man on on woman.
In terms on who is getting wronged (sinned), I see no difference. In both cases there are 2 consenting adults and I for one see no difference in terms of sin. in fact making love (whether it be homosexual or heterosexual) , i really dont see any difference-except what the bible supposedly says about it-which is unsubstantiatied , and seen as no different in the eyes of "God". 😛
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by sumydidHow does the fact that you can't be bothered about a word being wrongly used as a "sword" because you've seen it used as a sword against Christians so many times, constitute anything other than a self-regarding post for posting's sake?
What part of me welcoming you to proceed do you equate with me supporting the kind of behavior you describe? I can hardly count the baseless assumptions you squeezed into that post.
22 Nov 11
Originally posted by karoly aczelMy post was on page 7 of this thread in which I was referring to you and
I believe this whole notion of me trying to "indoctrinate" people came from page 7 where I challenged Rj to show me where I have tried "indoctrinate people" into my way of thinking ,(or what ever) , and Rajk has stepped in and tried to show how I was trying do just that.
Since then he has been trying post after post to prove that I am an "indoctrinat ...[text shortened]... -which is unsubstantiatied , and seen as no different in the eyes of "God". 😛
robbie indoctrinating your kids. The fact that you have or have not tried
to indoctrinate anyone on this forum has nothing to do with that. But
someone on this thread believed you were trying to indoctrinate him. I
still think you will be trying to indoctrinate your kids.
22 Nov 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsGoing by this definition - almost every post in this forum (or any other forum) would be an attempt to "indoctrinate" others.
Yes it is. To imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view
means to influence. That was part of the definition of indoctrination.
In the way most people use the term, "indoctrination" involves an attempt to forcefully impose one's own beliefs on others. It generally works only in an environment in which all other beliefs can be suppressed.
As for karoly aczel -- of everyone in this forum, he seems to be the LEAST interested in "indoctrinating" anyone else regarding what he believes. Clearly, Rajk strongly disagrees with some of karoly's beliefs, and karoly disagrees with some of Rajk's beliefs. But this is NOT "indoctrination".